Lisa Irwin - Missing - One Year Later , page 195

Pages: << 192 193 194 195 >>
ATS Members have flagged this thread 41 times

reply posted on 5-4-2012 @ 08:09 AM by wildtimes

reply to post by blahandblahandyadayada2

Picerno did not allow Bradley or Irwin to be interviewed for this story but said the couple are cooperating with law enforcement authorities.

However, there are no new developments or clues, and the baby’s disappearance remains a mystery, authorities said.

Lisa no longer is the lead story of national early morning news shows or nighttime cable television newscasts. And the local and national media are no longer stationed in front the family’s home.

Picerno said the family has struggled to settle back into a normal routine without Baby Lisa.

Irwin has returned to his job as an electrician. Lisa’s half-brothers are back in school. And Bradley remains a stay-at-home mom who makes sure the household operates as smoothly as possible.

To occupy her time, Picerno said, Bradley has created a website aimed at finding Lisa or gathering clues to her disappearance.

Read more here: www.kansascity.com...#storylink=cpy

To "occupy her time"??? What?
It should be her number-one mission, her PRIORITY....her most critical job....!!

He did not 'allow' them to be interviewed? What, is he their keeper now? Does he live with them?

'stay-at-home mom who makes sure the household operates as smoothly as possible'

A homemaker is a demanding, never-ending job....it is an overtime job, on duty 24/7/365...even if the kids are with a care provider and mom and dad want to go out to a movie....they are STILL expected to be available if an emergency arises.

Same with her precious and disastrous 'adult time'....was she just "occupying her time" when she got poo-faced drunk with 3 kids in the home, one a sick toddler?

Anyone who thinks a stay-at-home mom of two school-age kids, who has a home and yard to tend to, along with all the chores and upkeep, is delirious. Occupy her time.....sickening.

Uggh. ... thanks for the update yadda. I haven't even been looking at my own city's news lately.

edit on 5-4-2012 by wildtimes because: (no reason given)

reply posted on 27-5-2012 @ 08:08 AM by Xcathdra

New update - bizzare....

Missing baby Lisa: Is debit card fraud a clue?

Their frustration with police mounting nearly eight months after their daughter vanished, the parents of a missing Missouri baby are hoping that a fraudulent debit card charge could be the breakthrough that helps authorities find their child.

Jeremy Irwin and Deborah Bradley, whose 10-month-old daughter Lisa disappeared on the night of Oct. 4, appeared on TODAY Monday along with their attorney to discuss the latest wrinkles in the case. In early November, just over a month after Lisa vanished, Irwin said his debit card was stolen. The card was suspended for a fraudulent charge for $69.04 while two other charges were attempted. He said the charge was made to a British website that advertises a service to legally change your name or your child’s name online.

click link for remainder of story.

reply posted on 27-5-2012 @ 08:33 AM by wildtimes

reply to post by Xcathdra

Very strange. What do you make of it?

Thanks for alerting me!! I think about it from time to time, wonder what happened to that little girl...
seems sketchy about the website, where did that 'footage' come from that showed the name-changing offer? Even Jeremy said he called and talked to an office supply place, so, what the....??

reply posted on 9-9-2012 @ 10:01 AM by silo13

reply to post by Xcathdra

Unreal stuff - I don't know how I missed this post a few months ago. I come back here every once in a while to see if there's anything 'new' on Lisa. To think she might be still alive, out there and someone's trying to change her name? Well, it's hard to keep believing and harder still to imagine the someone(s) who pulled off her kidnapping is stupid enough to try to change her name - but hope springs eternal huh?

Peace

reply posted on 9-9-2012 @ 10:22 AM by wildtimes

I was enjoying the perfect weather yesterday, so peaceful, and thought about little Lisa. It's more than 11 months now...no sign of her.

Wonder where she is? She'd be almost 2 now.

reply posted on 29-9-2012 @ 02:30 PM by Dav1d

Curious, can we now at last acknowledge that the police were not simply giving them enough rope to hang themselves? The police gambled, played the odds, and Lisa lost!

reply posted on 29-9-2012 @ 08:18 PM by Xcathdra

Originally posted by Dav1d
Curious, can we now at last acknowledge that the police were not simply giving them enough rope to hang themselves? The police gambled, played the odds, and Lisa lost!

I keep forgetting to come to this thread.. sorry people...

As for your post its not quite that simple... Just because a person(s) are not charged do not mean the police made a mistake. Its difficult to charge 2 parents with the murder of their child without a body. In incidents like this its going to rely more on physical evidence. Its more difficult to argue a circumstantial case without anything linking the parents physically to the crime itself. Couple that with the choice of a jury trial, which would almost be certain based on the circumstances, and you are left with the states prosecutor accusing grieving parents of killing their child with nothing physical to link them to the crime = jury will side with the parents.

Also some other things to consider.... Again lacking more direct evidence and going only with circumstantial, if charges are filed and the process makes it pass the "red line" where jeopardy is attached there is no going back. If the state loses its case or the judge tosses it they cannot be charged again.

Refiling charges based on new evidence is extremely difficult (from what I have seen / been involved in).

In MO there is no statute of limitations (RSMo 556.036) for murder, forcible rape, attempted forcible rape, forcible sodomy, attempted forcible sodomy............etc.

Better to go with a cold case for 25 years in hopes of finding the evidence to bring whomever to justice than jump the gun, screw the case based on lack of evidence, only to find out later on the parents were in fact the murders and not be able to do anything about it.

edit on 29-9-2012 by Xcathdra because: (no reason given)

reply posted on 29-9-2012 @ 08:40 PM by Dav1d

You are right, it is better to go with evidence!

Now me like I've acknowledged all along, the evidence just isn't here in this case. The police failed to secure the evidence to prosecute this case. I also believe if you don't have the evidence, you don't attempt to condemn someone on TV, as the police did here. The police here chose to target a family and attempted to the best of their ability to find evidence that supported their belief. Rather than gather the evidence and follow it to where it leads.

reply posted on 29-9-2012 @ 09:32 PM by Xcathdra

Originally posted by Dav1d
You are right, it is better to go with evidence!

Agreed

Originally posted by Dav1d
Now me like I've acknowledged all along, the evidence just isn't here in this case.

Agreed

Originally posted by Dav1d
The police failed to secure the evidence to prosecute this case.

No they did not. Police do not prosecute the case, the prosecuting attorney does. The Police can submit all the evidence and reports they want however until the PA decides to file the charges there is nothing else the police can do. The PA is the ultimate authority on whether or not a case is prosecuted.

Originally posted by Dav1d
I also believe if you don't have the evidence, you don't attempt to condemn someone on TV, as the police did here.

I disagree and agree at the same time... I think its possible there is circumstantial evidence and by using the media its possible they were hoping something more definite would fall out of the evidence tree. IF parents murder their child its not common for other family members to help cover it up. Using the media allows the police to essentially shake the family tree, allowing family members to apply pressure rather than it coming directly from the police. Relatives can make more of an impact at times than police can.

Originally posted by Dav1d
The police here chose to target a family and attempted to the best of their ability to find evidence that supported their belief. Rather than gather the evidence and follow it to where it leads.

Since neither of us are on the inside ofthe investigation its a toss up on whether police actions are valid or not on this one.

reply posted on 29-9-2012 @ 11:22 PM by Dav1d

Originally posted by Xcathdra

Originally posted by Dav1d
The police failed to secure the evidence to prosecute this case.

No they did not. Police do not prosecute the case, the prosecuting attorney does. The Police can submit all the evidence and reports they want however until the PA decides to file the charges there is nothing else the police can do. The PA is the ultimate authority on whether or not a case is prosecuted.

Nice try at spin...
Fact remains that the police failed to secure the evidence. In this case the prosecuting attorney has so far failed to indict anyone, let alone prosecute. Hence my statement that the police failed to secure the evidence to prosecute this case.

Originally posted by Xcathdra

Originally posted by Dav1d
I also believe if you don't have the evidence, you don't attempt to condemn someone on TV, as the police did here.

I disagree and agree at the same time... I think its possible there is circumstantial evidence and by using the media its possible they were hoping something more definite would fall out of the evidence tree. IF parents murder their child its not common for other family members to help cover it up. Using the media allows the police to essentially shake the family tree, allowing family members to apply pressure rather than it coming directly from the police. Relatives can make more of an impact at times than police can.

Originally posted by Dav1d
The police here chose to target a family and attempted to the best of their ability to find evidence that supported their belief. Rather than gather the evidence and follow it to where it leads.

Since neither of us are on the inside ofthe investigation its a toss up on whether police actions are valid or not on this one.

We are almost a year into this case. The simple fact remains that after trashing the family in public, we are no closer in determining what actually happen to baby Lisa. The jury pool has been tainted by the actions of the police, and finding intelligent jurors who haven't reach a conclusion will be difficult in this case. If by valid, we mean the police were able to locate baby Lisa, the police have clearly failed!

reply posted on 29-9-2012 @ 11:44 PM by Xcathdra

reply to post by Dav1d

Its not spin.... Its called being a police officer.

reply posted on 30-9-2012 @ 09:26 AM by wildtimes

Debbie is STILL refusing to speak to the police alone.
There was a clip on the news the other day (reminding people of the case):

Police: Baby Lisa Irwin's mom only one who can provide answers

KANSAS CITY, MO (KCTV) -
Debbie Bradley isn't talking to investigators and only she can provide needed answers in the investigation into her missing daughter, Kansas City police said Friday.

Police issued the statement just ahead of next week's one-year anniversary of the disappearance of then 10-month-old Lisa Irwin from her Northland home.

Debbie Bradley said she put her ill 10-month-old daughter in her crib about 6:30 p.m. on Oct. 3, 2011. Since then, Lisa Irwin hasn't been seen.

It is the most direct comment that police have made about Bradley since the initial days when the baby was reported missing on Oct. 4.

Bradley and the child's father, Jeremy Irwin, maintain their daughter was kidnapped from her crib and they had nothing to do with her disappearance.

"I just want her back," Irwin told reporters Friday afternoon.

Detectives have exhausted all leads provided by the child's family and their attorneys, according to the statement.

"The leads were of no benefit to the investigation," according to the statement from Capt. Steve Young. "While communication with the family has been ongoing, police have not had the opportunity to sit down one-on-one with Lisa's mother, Deborah Bradley. As the only adult in the home at the time of the baby's disappearance, police continue to have questions to which only she can provide answers."

Vid and article and all the background info and coverage can be found on the link.

She Just Won't Talk To Them Without Her Attorney.
Still fishy. Very fishy.

edit on 30-9-2012 by wildtimes because: (no reason given)

reply posted on 30-9-2012 @ 10:32 AM by Dav1d

In America it's still legal for now, and she is still within her rights, what few we are permitted to retain. The police drew the line in the sand, without sufficient evidence, and have to the best of their ability attempted to convict her.

reply posted on 30-9-2012 @ 10:48 AM by wildtimes

reply to post by Dav1d

Well hi there, Dav1d, long time since you've been here!

She will not speak to them. I still maintain if she wants her baby back so badly, she should talk to them. The article says "every day she goes out with fliers to post", but...every day she REFUSES to speak to police, who are equipped to help her FIND HER DAUGHTER.

If they have questions for her, why is she not answering those questions? Stubborn pride? Fear? GUILT?

Why did Netanyahu walk out of the UN Assembly when his opponent took the podium?

Sorry, a year later, she still looks guilty in my opinion. If she can't answer for herself and her behavior, that's one thing. She would STILL be unable to answer for herself privately. If, however, she has something to hide, she would not want to be "called into the boss's/principal's office" all by her lonesome.

She still looks cowardly, her actual part or innocence in the event notwithstanding.

reply posted on 5-10-2012 @ 04:49 AM by silo13

Debbie Bradley again in national spotlight on 1-year anniversary

KANSAS CITY, MO (KCTV) - The mother of a missing Northland girl is again in the national spotlight. Inside Edition looks at the vigil to mark the one-year disappearance of baby Lisa Irwin. The child hasn't been seen since her mother, Debbie Bradley, says she put her then 10-month-old daughter into her crib to sleep about 6:40 p.m. Oct. 3, 2011. Bradley and the child's father, Jeremy Irwin, attended the vigil at the home Wednesday night. Bradley became choked up with emotion. A year later, there are no traces of what happened to the blue-eyed baby. Inside Edition has more details on the vigil.

Time just flies by doesn't it.

And she's still not home.

peace

reply posted on 17-10-2012 @ 09:43 AM by schmae

I knew we were near the 1 year anniversary. Time has flown by and I hope it has been kind to Baby Lisa.
What a little angel. I hope she's walking and talking in some gorgeous mansion in the swiss alps.
I had robitussin for breakfast, can you tell ?

reply posted on 26-2-2013 @ 01:04 AM by silo13